Interesting, I’m working with a small Foreign
Municipality at the moment.

We favour Direct Mail to our English visitors
in the form of the Mayor asking for help with
a survey.

Those participating will receive a discount
card that can be used in the town.

The survey will be web based.

The system should be relatively easy to
test. The copy will be as long as it needs
to be.

If you’re thinking of working with an
entity such as a local authority it’s
essential to figure out what you’re
aiming to sell.

We’re hoping to increase repeat
business and gain some recommendations.

The novely, of course, is receiving a
letter, with a foreign stamp, from the
mayor of the place where
you were on holiday.

Stephen

P.S. Ogilvy is very explicit about the
kinds of images that work. I have
invariably found him to be correct
even though it is twenty seven years since
Ogilvy on Advertising was published.

Thanks, Stephen and Sonia,

I agree with ‘it depends’!

Still trying to work this out though. I guess my question was how relevant long-copy advertising is considering the internet. I understand long copy sells better than short when a person is interested in the product, and you get that interest with a great headline and subheads, and a good image. Even Ogilvy, who correctly raves against irrelevant pictures, says a good image with a good headline is most effective.

Today there’s so much more advertising around than in Ogilvy’s day, so a big part of of advertising is about being seen amidst the clutter.

Also, testing is expensive and most of my clients (small business and local governments) won’t do it. The closest we’ve come is tracking response to ads with coupons and postcards in a series (including web hits).

Whether to create a catalog or other long-copy printed item is weighed against the cost and effort to web banner ads, sponsored links, enewsletters, and short-copy ads/postcards that direct people to a website. Short copy still has to sell the benefits.

And then there’s the whole thing about mixing emotional and rational appeals! From neurosciencemarketing.com: Campaigns with purely emotional content performed about twice as well (31% vs. 16%) as those with only rational content, and those that were purely emotional did a little better (31% vs 26%) than those that mixed emotional and rational content.

To me that says, emotional engagement in the short-copy print material, long-copy details online.

I have both ‘Ogilvy on Advertising’ and
The Unpublished David Ogilvy’.

I wish I had worked for him,

As for long vs short copy the answer is:
“It depends”.

People have always had short attention
spans but the more money they are
spending, relative to their income, the
more they are prepared to read.

You cannot, however, bore your reader
into making a purchase.

This means you must either be giving them
some information, or promising them some.
A related alternative is to offer reassurance
which will cause your reader to identify with
your message.

I wouldn’t attempt to sell Polo Mints with
long copy, but a Mediterranean Cruise
will benefit from some words, as well as
pictures of a wonderful blue/green sea.

Stephen

Even more painful from a designer’s point of view, great-looking pages often perform poorly compared with “ugly” ones. Which is not to say you need ugly design to sell well, but many elements that make a page look terrific can also interfere with getting the copy across in a direct way.

The panels you’re talking about are in a very different context. They’re not answering a pressing problem that the reader may have (a problem for which the product being sold is a solution).

Designers often do want to cut the text, but if you do that without testing which version works better, you’re cheating your client. Advertising has to sell, not please the creative team.

Ogilvy’s personal stories are often very interesting and his observations are right on, timeless advertising truths to be sure, but most of the ad copy itself seems irrelevant. Tedious, status-seeking drivel. Manipulative. Slick and even slimy at times. That’s what those long-copy ads feel like to me, even such classics as “When I sat down at the piano they laughed.”

I’m a designer so that may be coloring my perception. We’re usually focused on creating the visuals that will create the feeling that will motivate the buy, and we always want to cut the text!

Ogilvy reproduces several ads from the 60s and 70s containing 500-1000 words. Did you read all that copy? What do you think about short vs. long copy?

My thinking is that short copy is more effective. The only evidence I have are a few studies of interpretive panels (signs along trails or in museums describing some natural or historical feature), which my company designs. These studies consistently show that 100-200 words is all most people will read and retain.

Do you know about any studies of what’s more effective: short or long copy?